Vilija Velyvyte – författare

The UK Regulatory Framework Post-Brexit provides a comprehensive analysis of the UK's post-Brexit regulatory framework and does so against the conceptual frame of the 'Law Unbound,' thereby reflecting an animating impulse of the Brexit campaign: to take back sovereign control over the regulatory domain. The contributors consider to what extent regulatory constraints still exist (de jure and/or de facto) and how far regulatory freedom has been exercised. They also make a qualitative assessment of the new status quo, insofar as there have been changes. The book is divided into three parts. The first part considers the institutional dimension of Brexit, with chapters on the constitution, Parliament, government, courts, devolved governments, and Northern Ireland. The second and third parts deal with the legal impact of Brexit in important areas of economic and social policy affected by withdrawal from the EU. The second part contains chapters dealing with goods, services, financial services, competition, subsidies, procurement, digital and data regulation, and intellectual property. The chapters in part three cover citizens' rights, immigration, asylum and refugee law, equality, employment, healthcare, consumer law, environment, food law, and criminal law.The introduction draws together and highlights themes that emerge from the individual chapters. It begins with analysis of the institutional dimension, with discussion of the pre-Brexit position, followed by constitutional, legal, and political change post-Brexit, including the territorial dimension concerning Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. It next examines the economic and social dimensions of Brexit, including the pre-Brexit position; post-Brexit legality, which captures the extent to which the Withdrawal Agreement and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement impose constraints; and the reality of post-Brexit regulation. The introduction provides analytical tools to help navigate the terrain, distinguishing between active divergence, passive divergence, inactive divergence, and continued convergence. This is complemented by consideration of the institutional and territorial aspects of post-Brexit regulation.

This book examines the role of the European Court of Justice in the regulation of the internal market from a competence perspective. However, rather than focusing on the Court’s role in enforcing the limits of EU competence in the EU’s political decision making, it explores a related, albeit understudied, question: to what extent does the Court observe the constitutional limits of EU competence and its own institutional powers in the interpretation of EU internal market law laid down in the Treaties? The book provides an answer to this question through the analysis of EU free movement case law in light of the constitutional principles that govern the allocation of competences and powers in the EU: conferral, subsidiarity and proportionality, on the vertical level, and institutional balance, on the horizontal level. Why should the Court be bound by these principles? What do they mean when applied to judicial practice? To what extent are they observed in the free movement case law? The book argues that the Court’s observance of the four principles has been inconsistent, thereby creating substantive and constitutional tensions in the EU’s relationship with the Member States and upsetting the institutional balance of powers between the EU legislature and judiciary.Shortlisted for the UACES Best Book Prize 2023Runner-up of the 2024 Peter Birks Prize for Outstanding Legal Scholarship

This book examines the role of the European Court of Justice in the regulation of the internal market from a competence perspective. However, rather than focusing on the Court''s role in enforcing the limits of EU competence in the EU''s political decision making, it explores a related, albeit understudied, question: to what extent does the Court observe the constitutional limits of EU competence and its own institutional powers in the interpretation of EU internal market law laid down in the Treaties? The book provides an answer to this question through the analysis of EU free movement case law in light of the constitutional principles that govern the allocation of competences and powers in the EU: conferral, subsidiarity and proportionality, on the vertical level, and institutional balance, on the horizontal level. Why should the Court be bound by these principles? What do they mean when applied to judicial practice? To what extent are they observed in the free movement case law? The book argues that the Court''s observance of the four principles has been inconsistent, thereby creating substantive and constitutional tensions in the EU''s relationship with the Member States and upsetting the institutional balance of powers between the EU legislature and judiciary.Shortlisted for the UACES Best Book Prize 2023Runner-up of the 2024 Peter Birks Prize for Outstanding Legal Scholarship

This book examines the role of the European Court of Justice in the regulation of the internal market from a competence perspective. However, rather than focusing on the Court''s role in enforcing the limits of EU competence in the EU''s political decision making, it explores a related, albeit understudied, question: to what extent does the Court observe the constitutional limits of EU competence and its own institutional powers in the interpretation of EU internal market law laid down in the Treaties? The book provides an answer to this question through the analysis of EU free movement case law in light of the constitutional principles that govern the allocation of competences and powers in the EU: conferral, subsidiarity and proportionality, on the vertical level, and institutional balance, on the horizontal level. Why should the Court be bound by these principles? What do they mean when applied to judicial practice? To what extent are they observed in the free movement case law? The book argues that the Court''s observance of the four principles has been inconsistent, thereby creating substantive and constitutional tensions in the EU''s relationship with the Member States and upsetting the institutional balance of powers between the EU legislature and judiciary.Shortlisted for the UACES Best Book Prize 2023Runner-up of the 2024 Peter Birks Prize for Outstanding Legal Scholarship